Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board - Thursday, 21 September 2023

1 Nau mai | Welcome

2 Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

3 Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

4 Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting held on Thursday, 14 September 2023 as true and correct.

5 He Tamōtanga Motuhake | Leave of Absence

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

6 Te Mihi | Acknowledgements

At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.

7 Ngā Petihana | Petitions

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

8 Ngā Tono Whakaaturanga | Deputations

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Puketāpapa Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

8.1 Raphaela Rose - the neighbourhood issue of the impacts of the raised speed table

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To enable an opportunity for Raphaela Rose to deliver a presentation during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Raphaela Rose will speak to the local board on the neighbourhood issue of the impacts of a raised speed table on Hayr Road and the negative impacts that it is having outweighing any positive speed calming outcomes.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) thank Raphaela Rose of her presentation.

8.2 Dr Mairi Jay - Global heating and the health impacts for people

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To enable an opportunity for Dr Mairi Jay to deliver a presentation during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Dr Mairi Jay will present on global heating and the health impacts for people. Climate experts in New Zealand have warned that an El Niño pattern of weather next summer is likely to bring higher than normal temperatures. The aim of the presentation is to alert board members to the possible impacts of high temperatures and humidity on the well-being of people in the Auckland region.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Dr Mairi Jay for her presentation.

9 Te Matapaki Tūmatanui | Public Forum

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of three minutes per speaker is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.

10 Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 September 2023

Classification of Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve

File No.: CP2023/13501

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To classify two land parcels in Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve, situated at 1 Clifton Road, Hillsborough as a recreation reserve pursuant to Section 16 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The land located at 1 Clifton Road, Hillsborough contains three land parcels legally described as Lots 2 and 4 DP 88243 as well as Part Lot 2 DP 11417. The latter parcel is subject to the Local Government Act 2002 and its jurisdiction resides outside of the purpose of this report.

3. By Resolution number PKTPP/2022/119 on 15 September 2022, the Puketāpapa Local Board adopted the te reo Māori name of Puke-karoro as a dual name for Hillsborough Reserve, which recognised its ancestral namesake (referred to hereafter as Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve).

4. The balance Lots 2 and 4 DP 88243 are held by Auckland Council in fee simple as unclassified recreation reserves subject to the Reserves Act 1977. Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve must be classified for its primary purpose in accordance with the Reserves Act.

5. Local boards hold delegated authority under Section 16 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977 to classify council-owned reserves which are not classified.

6. Iwi representatives were advised of the proposed classification and were invited to submit their feedback by 30 June 2023. Staff received one response which neither supported nor opposed the proposed classification.

7. The proposed classification was not publicly notified because it is the same purpose for which Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve has been held.

8. Staff recommend that the local board classify Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve as a recreation reserve.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whakaae / resolves to classify, pursuant to Section 16 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977, Lot 2 Deposited Plan 88243 comprised in Record of Title NA45D/118 as recreation reserve, and

b) whakaae / resolves to classify, pursuant to Section 16 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977, Lot 4 Deposited Plan 88243 comprised in Record of Title NA45D/120 as recreation reserve.

Horopaki

Context

Classification of reserves under the Reserves Act 1977 and the local board’s role

9. Auckland Council is required by law to classify all unclassified reserves which it holds. Classification is undertaken under Section 16 of the Reserves Act 1977. Auckland Council is not meeting its statutory obligations if classification is incomplete.

10. Classification of reserves under the Reserves Act identifies the principal or primary purpose of a reserve. The classification helps direct the reserve’s management, use, and development. Classification is necessary to enable the administering body to grant rights to third parties over reserves such as leases, licenses, and easements.

11. The local board holds delegated authority under Sections 16 (1) and (2A) of the Reserves Act to approve the classification of reserves held by Auckland Council within the local board’s area, subject to all statutory processes having been satisfied.

12. Staff recently discovered that Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve was unclassified when completing a land status report for the site. The discovery followed an application from the landowners of adjoining land at 2-4 Clifton Road to redirect their existing driveway (originally on legal road), which was lost during the severe January 2023 storm event.

13. Staff recommend prioritising the classification of Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve to rectify its unclassified status so that proper rights can be prepared for the adjacent landowners to enable access to their property. Reserves should be classified prior to granting any easements or other property rights.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. As Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve is held by Auckland Council under the Reserves Act, it is a statutory requirement to classify it according to its primary or principal purpose.

15. Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve comprises two parcels: Lots 2 and 4 DP 88243 located at 1 Clifton Road, Hillsborough (see Figure 1).

Figure 1 - An aerial view of Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve

Figure 2 - Lot 2 DP 88243

Figure 3 - Lot 4 DP 88243

16. Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve was originally acquired by the Borough of Onehunga in 1917. In 1982, following the subdivision of the surrounding land forming part of that original acquisition, Lots 2 and 4 DP 88243 were created and pursuant to the Local Government Act 1974, were both then vested as recreation reserves in the Mt Roskill Borough Council subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

17. By virtue of the Order-In-Council dated 9 June 1989 and published in the New Zealand Gazette on 13 June 1989 Issue No.99 giving effect to a Final Reorganisation, the Mt Roskill Borough Council became the Auckland City Council. As it followed, Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve became incorporated into all land held by the Auckland City Council.

18. The interest of the Auckland City Council in Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve has since become vested in Auckland Council by virtue of Section 35 of the Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Act 2009. As Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve was originally acquired by a legacy council rather vested by the Crown, Auckland Council must classify it pursuant to Section 16 (2A) of the Reserves Act.

19. Classification under Section 16 of the Reserves Act involves assigning the appropriate class (or classes) to a reserve. The class determines the principal or primary purpose of the reserve. When proposing to classify a reserve, its present values are considered as well as its potential values and the possible future uses and activities on the reserve.

20. Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve is currently used for recreation purposes, which is the purpose that was intended when it was vested by Onehunga Borough Council in Mt Roskill Borough Council in 1982.

Proposed classification – recreation reserve

21. Staff consider that classification of Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve as a recreation reserve is most appropriate as:

· Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve was vested in legacy council as a reserve for recreation purposes, and

· this recommendation aligns with current and intended future use of the reserve.

Consultation

22. Engagement with iwi is required for the proposed classification in terms of Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987.

23. On 29 May 2023 an email was circulated to all iwi groups identified as having an interest in land within the Puketāpapa Local Board area inviting feedback by 30 June 2023. Staff received one response to the proposed classification, which was from Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua. Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua confirmed that it neither supported nor opposed the proposal to classify Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve, but it did however raise concerns that it considered iwi had not been engaged by the council on the long-term management of Puke - karoro / Hillsborough Reserve). The response from Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua regarding Puke- karoro / Hillsborough Reserve has been circulated to relevant staff to address regarding the reserve’s ongoing administration, as well as formally recorded by way of this report.

24. Public notification of the council’s intention to classify Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve is not required as the proposed classification is the same as the purpose for which Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve was vested in the legacy council as well as is currently held and administered.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25. The proposal outlined in this report does not include any change in the current use of or activity on Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve and does not introduce any new source of greenhouse gas emission.

26. The proposed classification is the formalisation of a statutory requirement under the Reserves Act which is an administrative process and therefore will have no impact on climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

27. Staff shared the submission of Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua with the Manager of Area Operations for Puketāpapa and Team Leaders for Service and Asset Planning in Regional Services and Strategy, so that the views of mana whenua are known and addressed in the ongoing management of Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve.

28. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the advice in this report.

29. The views of relevant staff in Parks and Community Facilities were sought, including the Parks and Places Specialist, Facilities Manager, Parks Planning and Arborist, and all were supportive of the classification provided that any effects from the proposal to relocate the driveway were mitigated in the associated landowner approval.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

30. The Puketāpapa Local Board holds the delegated authority under Section 16 of the Reserves Act to resolve to classify Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve.

31. Through this report, staff seek a decision from the local board to resolve to classify Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve for the recommended recreation reserve purpose.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32. There is no express requirement to consult mana whenua under the Reserves Act. However, Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 states:

Act to give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi

This Act shall be so interpreted and administered as to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

33. The proposal to classify Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve was presented to the mana whenua groups identified as having an interest in the land via email dated 29 May 2023.

34. The deadline for mana whenua feedback on the proposed classification closed on 30 June 2023 and staff received one response from Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, who confirmed that it neither supported nor opposed the proposal to classify Puke-karoro / Hillsborough Reserve.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. The proposed classification is an administrative exercise and will not result in any costs to the local board. All costs (if any) relating to the publication of a notice of classification in the New Zealand Gazette will be met by Auckland Council’s Parks and Community Facilities department.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. The proposed classification will fulfil the council’s statutory requirement under the Reserves Act to classify all unclassified reserves which are either held or managed by the council.

37. If the reserve remains unclassified, the council will be in breach of this statutory requirement.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38. If approved, the resolution will take immediate effect in accordance with Section 16 (2A) of the Reserves Act.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bianka Griffiths - Specialist Technical Statutory Advisor

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe - General Manager Parks and Community Facilities

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 September 2023

Adoption of the scope for Puketāpapa Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan

File No.: CP2023/13148

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To whai / seek adoption of the scope to develop the Puketāpapa Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. On 20 July 2023 Puketāpapa Local Board approved the Customer and Community Services work programme including item 4025 to develop the Puketāpapa Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan [PKTPP/2023/96].

3. This item has $50,000 Locally Driven Initiatives operational budget allocated.

4. Sport and active recreation facilities plans offer strategic guidance to inform decision-making regarding investment, advocacy, partnerships, and opportunities within the sport and recreation facility network.

5. In a workshop on 24 August 2023 the Puketāpapa Local Board gave direction that the scope for the sport and active recreation facilities plan should cover:

a) Geographic area:

Provision within the Puketāpapa Local Board area, rohe boundaries specifically identified by mana whenua, sub-regional facilities and/or bespoke facilities that may not be within the local board remit but caters to a Puketāpapa catchment.

b) Type of activity

Sport and active recreation as defined within Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-2039.

c) Facility model

All facilities providing community access for sport and active recreation irrespective of ownership or operational model.

6. Development of the plan will continue through various community consultation and engagement phases before an analysis of findings and presentation of the draft plan in March/April 2024.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whai / adopt the full facility network scope to guide the development of the Puketāpapa Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan as detailed in Attachment A.

Horopaki

Context

Puketāpapa Local Board - Customer and Community Services Work Programme 2023/2024

7. On 20 July 2023 Puketāpapa Local Board approved the Customer and Community Services Work Programme including item 4025:

Activity Name: Puketāpapa Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan

Activity Description: Develop a Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan to identify sport and active recreation provision requirements, prioritise future facility developments, inform potential investment decisions and ensure maximum community impact. [PKTPP/2023/96].

8. This item has $50,000 Locally Driven Initiatives operational budget allocated.

Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plans

9. Sport and active recreation facilities plans offer strategic guidance to inform decision-making regarding investment, advocacy, partnerships, and opportunities within the sport and recreation facility network.

10. These plans outline the current network of sport and active recreation facilities across a specified geographic area and identifies existing and future provision challenges and needs.

11. Key outputs include:

· consolidated inventory of sport and active recreation facilities

· themes and trends of local facility needs and issues

· assessment of potential impacts of demographic and infrastructure changes

· identification of gaps in facility provision against current and future needs

· framework for prioritising projects/potential opportunities for further analysis and assessment

· prioritised list of projects/opportunities to provide clear direction to support advocacy, resource allocation and leasing decisions.

Puketāpapa Local Board Plan

12. Puketāpapa Local Board currently support sport and active recreation facilities through operational funding, capital funding and community leases within the Customer and Community Services work programme.

13. The development and effective implementation of the plan relates to several outcomes, objectives within the Local Board Plan as detailed below.

Table 1: Puketāpapa Local Board Plan - Strategic alignment

Outcome

Objective

Inclusive communities that are healthy, connected and thriving

Objective: We want to build lasting connections among the people of our communities and support each other to live more healthy lifestyles.

Well-planned neighbourhoods and vibrant public spaces

Objective: Our neighbourhoods are attractive and well connected, they are designed to support safe and healthy lifestyles with great access to parks and facilities.

Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport – Investment Plan 2019 – 2039

14. In July 2019, council adopted the Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport – Investment Plan 2019 – 2039 to guide investment into community sport, identifying three key sector challenges:

· The demand for sport in Auckland is growing and changing, while the existing facilities are ageing

· Not all Aucklanders have the same access and opportunities for sport

· Auckland Council needs a more structured and strategic approach to invest in sport

15. The development of a localised plan will offer specific insights into opportunities and challenges across the facilities network whilst highlighting synergies and uniqueness relative to sector-wide trends.

16. The Investment Plan will support the development of the Puketāpapa Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan and provides principles to assess projects and opportunities identified following community consultation.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Scope of works

17. The scope will guide the development of the Puketāpapa Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan which provides a comprehensive analysis of the local sport and active recreation facility network.

18. This scope offers a platform to capture a holistic understanding of facility provision and critically, a network overview of facilities offering community access and the subsequent levels of supply and demand.

19. The scope can be defined by three sub-categories; geographic area, type of activity, and facility model, to provide focus on what is captured and where.

Geographic area

20. The plan will consider community need and facility priorities within a defined geographic area.

21. The geographic scope will focus on provision within the Puketāpapa Local Board area, rohe boundaries specifically identified by mana whenua, sub-regional facilities and/or bespoke facilities that cater to the Puketāpapa catchment.

22. This geographic scope provides key benefits and is targeted to a defined area to provide the best outcomes for the communities of Puketāpapa as participants and/or facility providers.

Table 1: Benefits of geographic scope

Element of geographic scope	Benefits
Local board boundaries	This enables local board and decision-makers to identify specific needs in their local community. Understanding participation patterns and facility needs help guide decision-making.
Rohe boundaries or areas of cultural significance identified by mana whenua	Provides decision-makers and user-groups with facility needs, specific direction for sites of significance and considerations when working in collaboration with mana whenua. Rohe boundaries do not align with local board areas however this scope allows mana whenua iwi to include areas with supporting rationale.
Sub-regional facilities outside of Puketāpapa	Facilities of scale provide scope to facilitate participation for a wide population catchment and should be factored into provision requirements across the catchment they service. Insights of sub-regional provision will identify network gaps and ensure future investment is not duplicated.
Bespoke facilities outside of Puketāpapa	Facilities that provide a unique or highly specific offering may have less localised need. Understanding the network and the relative demand and supply will ensure decision-making is strategic and avoids duplication.

Type of activity

23. There are a myriad of different ways Aucklanders get active. The focus of this plan is to identify supply and demand gaps and opportunities within the Puketāpapa sport and active recreation infrastructure network.

24. The scope will help define and categorise what people are doing to get active before the development of the plan, then provide a geospatial analysis of how and where this occurs, what infrastructure requirements there are and solutions to promote and support participation.

25. The scope of activity type is sport and active recreation as defined within Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-2039.

Sport: Physical activity that is competitive, organised and involves the observation of rules. It may be participated in either individually or as a team.

Active Recreation: Physical activity that is informal and done for wellbeing, health and/or enjoyment. It may be participated in either individually or with a group.

26. Other forms of physical activity including ‘play’ and ‘physical education’ will not be specifically addressed however a mix of existing local and regional plans and policies will complement this mahi.

27. The scope of activity will include consideration for non-affiliate and/or casual sport and recreation facility use.

Facility model

28. The demand for sport in Tāmaki Makaurau is growing and changing with communities participating across a wide range of places and spaces of differing facility ownership and operating models.

29. The full network scope entails investigation of all facilities providing community access for sport and active recreation irrespective of ownership or operational model including:

a) Council owned land; council owned and operated facilities

b) Council owned land; council owned facility; community operated facilities (leased)

c) Council owned land; community owned and operated facilities

d) Council owned community facilities with potential for sport and active recreation

e) Ministry of Education (MoE) owned and operated facilities

f) Facilities of cultural significance providing community outcomes

g) Places of worship and education facilities (non-MoE) where there is community access

h) Private or commercially owned and operated facilities where there is community access

i) Department of Conservation owned land, where there is community access.

30. Offering insights of provision across the full range of providers delivers several key benefits and considerations.

Table 2: Key benefits and considerations

Facility model or opportunity	Benefit or consideration
Council-related	Understanding the council owned network allows the local board and council to make informed asset-based decisions and direct resourcing strategically.
Community facilities	Support for community-led development can be provided via direct grant investment, advocacy to regional or external funders and providing tenure assurances through leasing decisions that achieve the best community outcomes.
Community sport sector	Diversity of needs provides opportunities for partnership and to highlight new, innovative solutions for provision.
Partnership	A broad mix of providers offers opportunity for mutual strategic alignment and to leverage council investment.
Network overview	Capturing a true sense of the network will provide decision-makers with direction as to where, what and how to achieve the best outcomes for the community irrespective of ownership.

Scope summation

31. The scope detailed will provide a platform to capture the full local, sport and active recreation facilities network in its truest sense, recognising that the community sport sector is complex, diverse, and growing.

32. The three sub-categories help to focus the extent of investigation and subsequent findings, to support decision-making across the facilities network.

33. Defining the type of activity gives clarity whilst acknowledging various other plans and workstreams exist, all of which will complement this kaupapa.

34. The broad facility model scope recognises that whilst the local board plays an important role in the community sport facilities network, implementation of the plan will require a diverse mix of funders and partnerships.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35. There will be no direct impact on climate impacts from the adoption of the scope to develop the plan.

36. Following adoption of the final plan, implementation may involve investment into individual projects which will be assessed for climate impact before decision-making or investment by the local board.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

37. Staff will seek input from teams across Parks and Community Facilities, Regional Services and Strategy, and Active Communities.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

38. On 24 August 2023, the local board gave direction on the proposed scope to develop the Puketāpapa Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan.

39. As part of the local board engagement verbal feedback was provided with key considerations including:

· Ensure the plan will explore planned developments and consider future growth projects for sport and recreation linked with Kainga Ora housing developments in the local board area.

40. This scope highlights the activity, location and the types of facilities that will be included in the plan. Future growth will form part of the weighting criteria that prioritises projects and investment, with higher growth areas (such as Kainga Ora developments) with low existing provision given higher priority.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

41. Throughout the duration of the plan development there will be consultation with mana whenua iwi, mataawaka, marae, kura, and internal Māori Outcomes staff within council.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

42. The Puketāpapa Local Board has allocated $50,000 from the FY2023/24 Locally Driven Initiatives operational budget for the development of the plan [PKTPP/2023/96]. This decision will initiate spend against this budget.

43. Implementation of the plan will require budget allocation which will be sought in future annual work programmes. The budget sought will be dependant on projects prioritised and availability of local board annual budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

44. There are no significant risks identified in adopting the scope to develop the Puketāpapa Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. Should the local board adopt the scope staff will proceed to appoint a consultant and formalise a services agreement which will include the adopted scope of works.

46. Development of the plan will continue through various community consultation and engagement phases before an analysis of findings and presentation of the draft plan in March/April 2024.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Recommended scope

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Yvaan Hapuku-Lambert - Sport & Recreation Lead

Authorisers

Pippa Sommerville - Manager Sport & Recreation

Dave Stewart - General Manager Active Communities

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 September 2023

Funding Auckland's Storm Recovery and Resilience

File No.: CP2023/13300

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide local boards with an opportunity to provide input regarding the funding package that has been provisionally agreed with central government.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Seven months on from severe weather events in January and February 2023, many Aucklanders with impacted homes are still facing a challenging and uncertain future.

3. Auckland Council has worked with central government to secure a funding package that would enable people in the region to move forward with certainty, as quickly as possible.

4. The proposed funding package includes just under $2 billion of investment in storm recovery efforts for three key activities:

· repairing storm damage to the transport network

· Making Space for Water (the council’s flood mitigation programme) and other resilience projects

· Category 3 property buyouts.

5. If we do not accept the funding package, we will still need to fund the necessary infrastructure improvements but would not be in a position to buy out Category 3 homes.

6. Public consultation is underway from 11-24 September.

7. Local board feedback will be provided to the Governing Body along with public feedback ahead of its decision-making on 6 October 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that input is being sought from local boards at the same time as public consultation due to the very tight timelines involved and the need to provide certainty for impacted Aucklanders

b) whakarite / provide feedback on whether the local board supports Auckland Council agreeing to the funding package

c) whakarite / provide feedback on features of the package that you would like to comment on

d) whakarite / provide feedback on the design of the Category 3 buyout process.

Horopaki

Context

8. Severe weather events in January and February 2023 have had a devastating and lasting impact on many communities and thousands of individuals across Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland. Flooding and land slips have damaged or destroyed thousands of homes and up-ended lives and communities. Essential lifeline infrastructure and facilities have been impacted and are in urgent need of repair. This includes roads, bridges, stormwater systems and community facilities.

9. Seven months on, many Aucklanders with impacted homes are still facing a challenging and uncertain future. We need to support these Aucklanders and improve the resilience of our infrastructure so that we are better prepared and can mitigate the impacts of severe weather events.

10. Auckland Council has worked with central government to secure a funding package that would enable people in the region to move forward with certainty, as quickly as possible.

11. To achieve all the outcomes of the package the government would provide just under $1.1 billion of new and reprioritised existing funding, with the council investing around $900 million. This is the same “locally-led, centrally-supported” approach that has been taken with other regions affected by the January and February storm events, just at a larger scale. It is different from the Christchurch earthquake recovery, where central government funded all the purchase of properties.

12. As a locally-led effort, Auckland Council is expected to take the lead on the design and implementation of any package. This means we have a number of detailed decisions to make as part of our main decision whether to proceed with the co-funded package.

13. Public consultation is taking place from 11-24 September. Details can be found at https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/recoveryfunding

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. The proposed funding package includes just under $2 billion of investment in storm recovery efforts for three key activities, as outlined in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Proposed central government and Auckland Council contribution to recovery

	Central government funding	Auckland Council funding	Total
Transport network recovery	$309 million	$81 million	$390 million
Making space for water and other resilience projects	$380 million	$440 million	$820 million
Category 3 home buy-outs	$387 million	$387 million	$774 million
Total	$1,076 million	$908 million	$1,984 million

Transport network recovery

15. Auckland Council is projecting that $390 million will be needed to make repairs to roads and bridges that were damaged by the severe weather. This includes the Mill Flat Road bridge, access to Karekare and Piha, and a number of roads in the west, the north and on Aotea / Great Barrier Island that were significantly damaged. The funding would ensure that repairs can be undertaken with greater certainty.

Making Space for Water and other resilience projects

16. A critical part of recovery is making sure we are better prepared for future severe weather. Improving resilience is essential to provide security for those who will continue to live in hazard-prone areas. This includes the flood risk management projects such as those that we have outlined in the Making Space for Water programme that we consulted on last month.

17. This programme would allow us to create new ‘blue-green networks’ in areas with critical flood risks, and to rehabilitate streams so that they are more resilient to floods. We would be able to increase our stormwater maintenance and overland flow path management.

18. This portion of the funding package could also be used for other resilience projects, such as community based geotechnical projects where risks can be mitigated. Importantly, the funding package would allow us to move more quickly with our efforts to build resilience.

Category 3 property buy-outs

19. Homes in Category 3 are not safe to live in because the risk from future flooding or landslips is intolerably high. Options to reduce this risk at a property or community level are not available or affordable. Homes in these areas should not be rebuilt or remain on their current sites.

20. Central government’s co-funding conditions for Category 3 properties are that they must be:

· residential

· impacted by the severe weather events of January and February 2023

· subject to ongoing intolerable risk to life, and

· without an economic way to mitigate the risk.

21. The proposed funding package would provide up to $774 million to buy Category 3 homes and allow people affected by the January and February severe weather events to move on with their lives. The funding for this would be split evenly between Auckland Council and central government.

22. The $774 million is based on current estimates of around 700 homes to be included in this category. If this maximum amount is exceeded, central government and the council have agreed to work together in good faith to decide next steps.

23. Auckland Council would need to administer the buy-out process from start to finish, including the purchase and removal of homes, and the ongoing management of the land. We know that there would be extra costs that wouldn’t be fully co-funded through the proposed funding package, including the costs of demolishing buildings, and any costs arising from the ongoing management of the land. We will also need to consider how we best make use of the newly acquired land, for example public parks and blue-green networks.

24. We need to make some decisions about how the buy-out process would work, including the price we pay for Category 3 houses, how this works with insurance, and any conditions (e.g. price caps or exclusions) that might need to be put in place. Given the complexity of the task, we are proposing to take an approach where we work towards decisions that are simple, fair, cost-effective, timely, and give certainty to affected Aucklanders.

Accepting the funding package

25. If Auckland Council accepts the funding package:

· We will receive additional government funding to accelerate our efforts to increase the resilience of our infrastructure.

· We can get on with making improvements that would otherwise take decades to achieve.

· We can offer a process forward for Category 3 property owners.

· We will need to find extra revenue to meet the council funding commitment.

26. If Auckland Council does not accept the funding package:

· We won’t receive all the proposed funding from central government, although we could still anticipate receiving some of the transport funding in the normal way, and could apply to the National Resilience Plan for further funding without a guarantee of our applications being successful.

· We will still need to fund the necessary infrastructure improvements and may need to take longer to do this using the available council funding methods.

· We won’t be in a position to buy out Category 3 homes: some property owners would face severe hardship and people would remain at risk.

27. Accepting the funding package would be a significant step in the recovery process. We acknowledge that recovery is not happening as quickly as affected communities would like. There is a difficult balance between moving quickly and moving accurately, especially with so many thousands of potentially affected homes needing individual technical assessments. It’s important that everyone can have confidence in the information and evidence available so that we can make robust, defensible and enduring decisions.

28. We also need to balance the needs of impacted homeowners with the needs of the wider community and consider the affordability and hazard management impacts for all Aucklanders.

Methodology of Category 3 buy-outs

29. If we go ahead with the funding package, the details of the purchase methodology for Category 3 properties would need to be determined, and would have a strong influence on how simple, fair, cost-effective and timely our process could be, and how much certainty we could offer affected homeowners.

30. Some of the policy details we need to consider include:

· How we define Category 3 residential properties. We need to consider whether we should make different provisions for holiday homes and rentals that are assessed as being in Category 3, compared to primary residences. We will not be purchasing non-residential properties.

· How we set the buy-out price. If our starting point is to take a ‘fair value’ approach, we need to decide how we assess that. Using capital value (the valuation that helps us to assess rates bills) would be the quickest option but wouldn’t necessarily reflect the true market value of every individual house. Establishing market value would be a much slower option: it could delay the process and would add further administrative costs. We could adopt a hybrid approach that gets most of the money to homeowners sooner and allows the balance to be resolved through valuation. Other alternatives would be to offer a fixed sum to all Category 3 homeowners or establish a sliding scale of payment based on hardship.

· The size of owner contributions. Like all investments, property ownership carries risks. Aucklanders, through Auckland Council, do not guarantee owners against loss. Auckland Council will need to consider whether to offer 100% of the value of the property, or a lesser amount, provided we can meet our objective of removing people from situations of intolerable risk. This could take the form of a cap on buy-out offers above a certain amount.

· What we do about insurance settlements, and uninsured and underinsured properties. Government and council contributions are intended to ‘top up’ rather than replace any amounts received through private insurance or EQC (Earthquake Commission). We still need to decide how this would work in practice. We also need to determine a fair outcome both for homeowners and for the Aucklanders who will have to fund buy-outs. This will mean we need to consider if Aucklanders who had no insurance or limited insurance should receive more, less or the same as other Category 3 homeowners.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

31. The response that is being proposed in this funding package is a one-off, made necessary by the urgent and extraordinary scale of events.

32. As climate change increases the risk of severe weather events, Auckland Council will not be in a position to continue to buy out other flood- and slip-affected homes. We are working to improve public awareness of hazards, so that Aucklanders are better able to manage their risks. We are also reviewing our approach to the planning and development of homes in areas with natural hazards, however the impact of this is confined largely to new development, and doesn’t address the legacy of thousands of homes that are already built in higher-risk areas.

33. We are strongly advocating to central government to establish a national scheme to support recovery from future events, and to put in place better processes for managed retreat in advance of disaster.

34. Both the Auckland Plan 2050 and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan advocate for greater resilience to severe storms and flood events. A key principle of the proposed Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan is ‘Opportunities to build resilience and avoid future harm are sought proactively’.

35. The funding received from central government for Making Space for Water and other resilience projects will enable Auckland Council to implement the initiatives within these plans in a way that both builds resilience to the impacts of climate change, and has a lower carbon impact than the solutions that have historically been utilised.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. The Recovery Office is working with Legal, Finance, the Chief Planning Office and the Mayoral Office to consider the approach set out by the Crown, the implications for council, and the appropriate parameters for council’s actions at each stage of the negotiations and potential implementation process. The Executive Leadership Team sub-group also spans the relevant parts of the council that are necessary to input and/or be involved in this process.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

37. During August, local boards and local communities provided feedback on the draft Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan, which will inform how government funding for infrastructure will be allocated. Staff are currently analysing the feedback to inform the final content of the Plan.

38. This report provides the opportunity for local boards to give feedback specifically on the funding agreement that has been agreed in-principle with central government.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

39. The Recovery Office is engaging with mana whenua representatives to discuss the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan. Meetings are underway and will continue throughout September. These meetings also provide opportunity to discuss the government funding package.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40. Auckland’s recovery from the severe weather events of early 2023 is going to require significant investment, with or without central government co-funding. The proposed package increases the total investment into Auckland, with over $1 billion in new and reprioritised central government funding.

41. Significant funding from Auckland Council would still be required to deliver on the activities described in this package.

42. If we agree to proceed with the funding package, we would initially use borrowing to fund Auckland’s share of the proposal, until we can make more considered funding decisions in the next long-term plan. This is due to be consulted on in early 2024.

43. Using borrowing in the short term would mean we could get the infrastructure repairs and the Category 3 buy-out process moving quickly.

44. Based on initial timing projections the additional council debt required is likely to peak at $650 million. This would increase the debt-to-revenue ratio by 7 – 9 per cent over the next five to seven years, remaining within current debt limits.

45. The council has a number of options to fund the proposed package in the long-term plan, including reducing or deferring other capital spending, sale of assets, service reductions, and rates. These decisions may also be impacted by the outcomes of the government’s water reform process.

46. If the council were to proceed with the full proposed programme and fund it using only rates, then this would require an additional rates increase equivalent to 3.1 per cent of general rates, which could be phased in over two years. Any rates increase would be on top of other significant budget pressures the council is facing. Current indications suggest overall rates increases of over 10 per cent for 2024/2025 for residential ratepayers, if cost reductions or funding sources are not found.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

47. Risks and mitigations with the Crown offer process are identified in Table 2.

Table 2. Risks and mitigations with the Crown offer process

Risk	Mitigations
More than 700 properties are identified as category 3.	Good faith commitment with the Crown to develop a joint response if this situation arises.
Eligibility criteria for the National Resilience Plan have not yet been defined, meaning there is a risk to accessing the pre-committed funding for resilience	Address within terms of the agreement
Significant additional funding required from Auckland Council	An existing risk that will need to be addressed in the Long-term Plan 2024-2034, regardless of the Crown offer.
Terms of the Crown offer do not adequately provide for the complexity of the council processes needed to undertake buy outs.	Policy and legal analysis is underway to consider the implications of the terms of the agreement, to be reported to the Governing Body.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

48. Technical assessment of affected homes and remediation of damaged infrastructure will continue throughout the decision-making process.

49. Public consultation is underway from 11-24 September.

50. The Governing Body will meet on 6 October to consider input from local boards and feedback from public consultation and will decide whether to agree to the proposed funding package.

51. If the package is agreed, the council will begin conversations with confirmed Category 3 home-owners at the end of October.

52. From November, voluntary buy-outs for Category 3 properties will begin, as technical assessments are confirmed.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Megan Howell – Recovery Specialist

Authorisers

Mat Tucker – Group Recovery Manager

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 September 2023

Local board feedback on Emergency Management Bill

File No.: CP2023/13085

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To request local board input into the development of the Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee’s submission on the Emergency Management Bill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Emergency Management Bill (the Bill) intended to replace the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (CDEM Act) is open for submissions until 3 November 2023. The Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee will make a submission to the Bill.

3. Further to the Memo to Governing Body, local board members and Independent Māori Statutory Board dated 17 August, this report invites local boards to provide input into the development of the Committee’s submission. A high-level overview of the Bill is provided, and a more detailed summary of the Bill’s more significant changes is attached.

4. Decisions on the Bill, submissions to it and subsequent progress will be made by the government formed after the general election in October 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide input to the development of Auckland Council’s submission on the Emergency Management Bill.

Horopaki

Context

5. The Emergency Management Bill to replace the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (CDEM Act) is open for submission until 3 November 2023 and can be accessed via legislation.govt.nz

6. The Bill is a part of the programme of policy work known as the Trifecta Work programme that arose out of the government’s response to the 2017 report of the Technical Advisory Group on Better Reponses to Natural Disasters and other Emergencies.

7. Comment is sought on the Bill as currently presented. Please note that decision-making on the progress of the Bill will be made by the government formed after the general election in October 2023.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Emergency Management Bill

8. The Emergency Management Bill updates the emergency management system to improve performance, modernise the current legislative and regulatory framework, and acknowledge the importance of community resilience and preparedness. The Bill builds on the CDEM Act and:

· restructures the Bill to a more modern approach

· includes current provisions with minor amendment

· introduces new language and terminology, as a consequence of the shift from ‘Civil Defence Emergency Management’ to ‘Emergency Management’

· introduces more significant change consistent with the Technical Advisory Group’s recommendations and the government’s response.

A more modern Bill

9. The Bill is structured with parts and sub-parts (some accompanied with outlines of their contents) and makes extensive use of headings. Some sections of the CDEM Act are moved to the Schedules of the Emergency Management Bill.

Current provisions minorly amended

10. Much of the current CDEM Act is carried over with minor amendment. The placement of these clauses within the Bill’s structure means provisions carried over may be placed in a different order than they appeared in the CDEM Act.

Language and terminology

11. Changes to language and terminology appear throughout the Bill including:

New terminology	Outgoing terminology
Emergency Management	Civil Defence Emergency Management
Emergency Management Committee	Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee
Emergency Management Committee Plan	Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee Group Plan
Coordinating Executive	Coordinating Executive Group
Area Controller	Group Controller
Area Recovery Manager	Group Recovery Manager
emergency designation	a state of emergency or a transition period

More significant changes

12. The more significant changes introduced by the Bill are summarised briefly below, and in more detail in Attachment A.

Greater recognition of the role of Māori and enhancing Māori participation

13. The role of iwi and Māori has been increasingly recognised in the practice of emergency management since the Christchurch and Kaikoura earthquakes. The Bill recognises the role of iwi and Māori in emergency management at all levels, through representation, requiring each committee to improve its capability and capacity to engage with iwi and Māori, and making involvement consistent nationally.

Changes to the requirements regarding the Emergency Management Committee Plan (currently the Group Plan)

14. Emergency Management Committees will need to engage with representatives of disproportionately impacted communities (such as seniors and the disabled), iwi and Māori, and other people or groups as appropriate, before it approves a Plan. This is to encourage more proactive engagement with communities as a part of Plan development.

Critical infrastructure

15. New requirements are introduced in addition to changing the terminology from ‘lifeline utilities’ to ‘critical infrastructure’ entities/sector. The requirement to share information is made explicit for the purpose of the Bill. A new requirement to develop and publish the planned level of service during emergencies is introduced.

16. The provisions in the Bill are part of a wider policy development programme to develop a more resilient model led by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, that recognises a broader range:

· of infrastructure (i.e. banks)

· of potential threats (i.e. cyberattack)

· and their dependencies and interdependencies.

The role of Emergency Management Committees compared to the functions and duties of local authority members of Emergency Management Committees

17. The Bill clarifies the different roles of Emergency Management Committees and local authorities. Some new requirements are added, and business continuity is provided for separately. The provisions are expressed in similar terms although the function and duties of local authorities are more oriented towards action.

Changes regarding emergency designation - State of Emergency and Notice of Transition Period

18. The term ‘emergency designation’ is introduced, meaning either a state of emergency or notice of transition. The Bill also requires the appointment of people able to declare a state of emergency or give a notice of transition period from the representatives on the Emergency Management Committee.

Regulations and Director’s rule-making powers

19. The Bill expands the range of matters regulations can be made for, including operational matters, infringement offences and breaches of rules. A new power is granted to the Director of the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) to make rules regarding roles and responsibilities in specific situations, technical standards, training, qualifications and other matters.

Infringements

20. The Bill sets up a framework for issuing, serving and payment of infringement notices for offences made under the regulation making powers of the Bill, for the purposes of the Bill.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. The definition of emergencies in the CDEM Act and the Bill includes naturally occurring emergencies such as severe weather and drought. It is widely anticipated that these types of emergencies will become more frequent and severe as a consequence of Climate Change.

22. The Bill updates the regulatory framework under the CDEM Act. Under the framework emergency management comprises the four R’s - Reduction, Readiness, Response and Recovery. Emergency management practice seeks to:

· reduce the risk from emergencies

· raise awareness of and preparedness for emergencies

· provide a platform for effective response to and recovery from emergencies.

23. The changes signalled by the Bill will be complemented by the review of the National Emergency Management Plan, the roadmap for the implementation of the National Disaster Resilience Strategy and the wider policy work related to infrastructure.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. The Bill and proposed changes to the framework for emergency management has implications across the Auckland Council group, due to our obligations as:

· managers of critical infrastructure

· providers of key information during emergencies

· potential staff to be redirected to support response and recovery activities.

25. Auckland Emergency Management is working with various parts of Auckland Council and CCO’s including Auckland Plan Strategy and Research, Healthy Waters, Local Board Services, Ngā Matarae, Auckland Transport and Watercare on the development of the submission to the Bill.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

26. This report requests input from local boards into the development of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee’s submission on the Bill.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. There is a high level of interest amongst iwi and Māori. NEMA has held several national hui. Similarly, engagement with marae and related discussions indicate an awareness and interest.

28. We have written to iwi and Māori to encourage them to both make their own submission on the Bill and provide comment or feedback that can be reflected in the development of Auckland Council’s submission. If there is interest, a hui on this topic may be held.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29. The changes signalled in the Bill will require amended or additional processes and practices and introduce additional cost across the emergency management system, it is uncertain when they will arise.

30. It is also unclear how such costs will fall between participating Emergency Management Committees, local authorities, ratepayers, critical infrastructure entities and sectors, their shareholders and consumers. There may also be implications for capacity amongst participants across the emergency management system, critical infrastructure entities and sectors.

31. The full financial and resource implications may not be known until the Bill is enacted, the National Emergency Management Plan reviewed, the roadmap for the implementation of the National Disaster Resilience Strategy completed and critical infrastructure policy confirmed. These programmes will be subject to the decision-making of the government to be formed after the General Election in October 2023.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. The general direction of policy on which the Bill is based has been signalled for some time. The submission process is the most effective means of managing risk of unfavourable change.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. A workshop of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee to consider the recommendations of the draft submission is scheduled for 18 October 2023. Materials will be circulated to Committee members in preparation for the workshop.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Summary of the Emergency Management Bill's more significant changes

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Wayne Brown -Principal Recovery Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Amaral – General Manager Auckland Emergency Management

Louise Mason – General Manager, Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 September 2023

Local board feedback on Māori seats for Auckland Council

File No.: CP2023/13088

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. For local boards to provide feedback to the Governing Body on whether Māori seats should be established for Auckland Council for the 2025 local elections.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council is undertaking public consultation on whether to establish Māori seats for the 2025 local elections.

3. Local board views and preferences are being sought concurrently as there is a statutory deadline of 23 November 2023 under the Local Electoral Act 2001.

4. Consultation is open from 21 August to 24 September 2023. Feedback provided through consultation will be reported to the Governing Body at their October 2023 meeting where a decision will be sought.

5. The materials developed to support consultation on this matter are attached to this report and include a full consultation document, summary document and feedback form (Attachments A, B and C). They are also available at akhaveyoursay.nz/maoriseats

6. The current legislation allows for one to two elected Māori ward seats on the Governing Body only. There are currently no provisions for Māori seats on local boards and no ability to make appointments to the Governing Body.

7. This report provides local boards with the consultation materials and seeks feedback to inform a Governing Body decision on Māori seats in October 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback to the Governing Body on whether Māori seats should be established for Auckland Council for the 2025 local elections.

Horopaki

Context

8. On 27 April 2023, the Governing Body agreed to seek the views and preferences of Māori and the wider public on Māori seats for Auckland Council.

9. Feedback received through this consultation will inform decision-making on whether to establish Māori seats for the 2025 local elections. This decision needs to be made in October 2023 to both align with the Governing Body meeting schedule and meet the Local Electoral Act 2001 deadline.

10. The material to support this consultation received approval from the Governing Body on 22 June 2023 and is attached to this report (Attachments A, B and C).

11. Local board feedback on Māori representation has been provided previously. In September 2022, Auckland Council submitted feedback on the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill. Within this omnibus bill are proposed changes to the provisions for Māori representation in local government.

12. In preparation of this submission, staff sought feedback from local boards. 13 of the 19 local boards that provided feedback on the omnibus bill requested that Māori representation at the local board level was investigated.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13. Māori seats are designated seats on a council for Māori representatives. Seats can be filled by election or by appointment, although in Auckland there is no ability to make appointments to the Governing Body. A change to legislation would be needed to do this.

14. Auckland Council has to date faced two challenges in introducing Māori seats: a binding poll provision and a set number of councillors for Auckland Council. The binding poll provision was repealed in 2021 and proposed legislative changes to the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, currently before the House, will remove the set number of councillors.

15. The removal of the set number will allow Auckland Council to determine the total number of councillors on the Governing Body between five and 29, in line with other councils in Aotearoa New Zealand.

16. Since 2017, the Governing Body has previously agreed ‘in-principle’ support for establishing one or more Māori wards (using the ‘Parliamentary model’) once the set number of councillors had been removed. This position remains the Governing Body’s preference on record to date. The Independent Māori Statutory Board has supported the ‘Royal Commission’ model for Māori representation on Auckland Council since 2021.

17. The ‘Parliamentary model’ (Māori wards) only includes elected seats. This model reflects how the Parliamentary Māori electorates are established. The ‘Royal Commission’ model that has received some support includes both elected and mana whenua appointed seats. This model would require changes to legislation as noted above.

18. Staff undertook preliminary engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka in 2022 on Māori seats for Auckland Council. Feedback from participants in this process was that neither the ‘Parliamentary’ nor the ‘Royal Commission’ model were suitable for Tāmaki Makaurau, however the ‘Royal Commission’ model received slightly stronger support for its inclusion of an appointed mana whenua seat.

19. The only model of Māori representation that is available under existing legislation is the ‘Parliamentary model’. This model includes a formula for determining the number of elected members representing Māori based on the number of voters on the Māori electoral roll and the total number of ward councillors. For Tāmaki Makaurau, this model would result in one or two elected Māori representatives depending on the total number of councillors. Any other model would require legislative change.

20. While the feedback from mana whenua and mataawaka contained a unanimous recognition that the status quo is no longer an option, it also emphasised that timing constraints to investigate and pursue legislative change should not deter investigating a bespoke approach for Tāmaki Makaurau.

Consultation on Māori seats for Auckland Council

21. The decision on Māori seats for Auckland Council is a significant one. It is about how Māori are represented in Auckland and how Aucklanders are represented by their Governing Body. As such, consultation with Aucklanders on this matter will consist of:

· regionwide consultation

· five-week consultation window (21 August-24 September 2023)

· two streams of engagement: a Māori engagement stream and a wider public engagement stream.

22. A range of engagement methodologies will be used including ‘in person’ and virtual with both hard copy and digital materials available. Engagement methods will include:

· marketing (Radio ads, social media, media releases)

· AK Have Your Say webpage

· webinars

· interest group events

· raising awareness of the consultation amongst diverse groups through community partner networking

· hard copy consultation materials at libraries, local board offices and Māori service provider sites

· dedicated mana whenua and mataawaka engagement

23. A key part of the consultation process is seeking input from local boards and presenting these views to the Governing Body for consideration in October 2023. This report seeks feedback to contribute towards decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24. While a decision about Māori seats does not in itself impact on climate, the introduction of Māori ward representatives as Auckland Council decision-makers may improve consideration of te ao Māori views on climate change and council-led responses.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. This matter affects the composition of the Governing Body and does not impact the group.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

26. This report seeks the views and preferences of local boards on Māori seats for Auckland Council’s Governing Body. This feedback will be provided to the Governing Body for consideration when a decision is sought on the matter in October 2023.

27. While the decision to be made in October 2023 is whether to establish Māori seats on Auckland Councils’ Governing Body, local boards have previously provided feedback on establishing Māori seats at the local board level.

28. Māori representation at the local board level is outside of the Local Electoral Act and legislative change would be required to introduce Māori seats on local boards. In the process of seeking local board views on the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill, 13 of the 19 local boards that provided feedback requested that Māori representation at the local board level was investigated.

29. Not all local boards who wish to introduce Māori representation would be eligible for Māori seats under the ‘Parliamentary model’ formula. If legislation were amended to allow for Māori representation on local boards, the formula would only allow for nine out of 21 local boards (43 per cent) to have Māori subdivisions based on current member numbers.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

30. Auckland Council has legal obligations to seek and consider Māori views on matters that Māori will be particularly affected by or interested in. The Local Government Act 2002 requires local governments to maintain and improve opportunities for Māori to contribute to decision-making processes and to consider the views and preferences of the persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in a matter. There are also common law obligations to consider Treaty principles, including partnership, rangatiratanga, active protection and informed decision-making.

31. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires the council to consider the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s advice on matters. The Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance to Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau recognises that increasing Māori representation is a priority action for enhancing Māori leadership and participation in local government decision making. The schedule advocates for council to ensure that Māori are enabled to contribute actively and meaningfully to the long-term future of Auckland through representation on council.

32. Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau – the Auckland Council Group’s Māori Outcomes Performance Measurement Framework - includes ten priority outcomes areas to direct council group investment and resource towards delivering Māori Outcomes in Tāmaki Makaurau.

33. The framework includes Kia Ora Te Hononga (effective Māori participation) and is underpinned by the ‘Mana’ outcome objective to ensure that “mana whenua and Māori are active partners, decisionmakers and participants alongside the Auckland Council Group”.

34. The Auckland Plan 2050 includes the outcome area of ‘Māori Identity and Wellbeing’. Council is committed to recognising and providing for te Tiriti o Waitangi outcomes, enabling Māori to exercise rangatiratanga in decisions that matter to and affect them.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. As this report is seeking the views and preferences of local boards for Governing Body consideration, there are no financial implications associated with this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. There are two key known risks associated with consultation on Māori seats for Auckland Council:

· there may be an increased risk of legal challenge due to the high level of public interest in the decision

· the set number of councillors is not removed for Auckland Council.

37. The risk of legal challenge can be mitigated through the commitment of appropriate budget and resourcing to deliver a robust consultation process.

38. As previously reported, the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill is currently in front of the House and has progressed to the Committee of Whole House stage. Among other legislative changes, the Bill proposes a removal of the set number of councillors for Auckland Council. This change, when it is enacted, will allow council to determine any number of councillors between five and 29, in line with all other councils in New Zealand.

39. Previously, Governing Body has agreed ‘in-principle’ support for establishing Māori seats subject to the removal of the set number of councillors.

Risk

Mitigation

Legal challenge

Failing to undertake a robust consultation process may increase the risk of legal challenge. This risk involves both reputational and financial consequences and may require the consultation to be repeated, resulting in additional costs to the council

Ensure that the consultation process is robust and effective. This requires budget and resource commitment at a time when council is working within a constrained environment. However, staff strongly advise that this robust process is required.

Legislative change not enacted

The Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill may not be enacted before parliament rises, meaning that Auckland Council is uncertain whether or not it will be able to determine the total number of councillors on the Governing Body.

This could impact the decision of the Governing Body to proceed with Māori wards as it will mean that a general ward would need to be disestablished in order to add a Māori ward.

Council cannot fully mitigate this risk.

However, we have provided coverage of this possibility in the consultation material to ensure that Māori and the wider public are appropriately informed when providing feedback.

Staff will monitor the progress of the Bill closely in order to provide accurate advice on options.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. Staff will report feedback from Māori, the wider public and local boards along with analysis to the Governing Body in October 2023 and seek a decision on establishing Māori seats for Auckland Council.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Māori Seats Consultation Document
b ⇨	Māori Seats Consultation Summary Document
c ⇨	Māori Seats Consultation Feedback Form

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Libby Orr – Advisor Governance Services

Authorisers

Rose Leonard – Manager Governance Services

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 September 2023

Biodiversity Credit System – central government discussion document

File No.: CP2023/13627

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an overview of central government’s discussion document entitled ‘Helping nature and people thrive – Exploring a biodiversity credit system for Aotearoa New Zealand’, and its potential implications for Auckland Council should such a system be advanced.

2. To provide an opportunity for Local Boards to offer any feedback to council staff to help inform the preparation of a council submission on the proposed Biodiversity Credit System.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Central government (Ministry for the Environment, Department of Conservation) published a discussion document on 7 July 2023 (weblink: Biodiversity Credit System) which is exploring the potential for a ‘biodiversity credit system’ that could be developed for Aotearoa New Zealand. Central government is seeking feedback on the need for and possible design of a biodiversity credit system, and the potential roles of government and Māori in implementing it.

4. Staff from Natural Environment Strategy (NES) are coordinating the development of a proposed Auckland Council submission. Staff are inviting feedback from local boards, mana whenua and the Rural Advisory Panel, to help shape the proposed Auckland Council submission which will be considered by the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee on 5 October 2023.

5. NES staff provided a webinar to overview the discussion document with approximately 40 local board members on 21 August 2023. Local board feedback to NES staff is due no later than 29 September 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide any feedback to council staff to help inform a council submission on the proposed Biodiversity Credit System by 29 September 2023

Horopaki

Context

6. The development of a national biodiversity credit system is intended to be used to increase funding opportunities from the private sector towards restoration efforts. This could be a catalyst to, or supplement, council activities, such as the regulatory implementation of the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB) and the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM).

7. The government’s discussion document is very much an initial consultation to start the national conversation about a potential biodiversity credit system that could be developed for Aotearoa New Zealand. Consequently, the government’s discussion document is very exploratory in nature and does not set out a specific proposed system with clear scope, roles and implementation mechanisms to provide feedback on, rather it discusses a number of different approaches that could be taken to different aspects of designing and implementing such a system.

Main points covered in discussion document

8. The discussion document explains:

a) what biodiversity credits and a biodiversity credit system are with some international examples that are emerging

b) what the benefits could be in the Aotearoa New Zealand context

c) different approaches that could be taken to the scope and design of a system, and

d) the distinct roles that government could play.

9. The discussion document includes consultation questions that seek views on the different approaches and roles for a biodiversity credit system.

10. Biodiversity credits are a way of attracting funding from the private sector, to invest in efforts by landowners to protect, maintain and enhance indigenous vegetation and habitats, including shrublands, grasslands, wetlands and natural and regenerating native forests. The credits are intended to recognise, in a transparent and consistent way, landholder projects or activities that protect, maintain and enhance indigenous biodiversity, or positive outcomes, e.g., a 1 % increase (or avoided decrease) in the indigenous biodiversity of a hectare.

11. By purchasing credits, people and organisations can finance and claim credit for their contribution to ‘nature-positive’ actions and outcomes. This is an emerging approach that is gaining considerable interest internationally. In Aotearoa New Zealand, credits could relate to protecting, restoring, and enhancing nature on public and private land, including whenua Māori (Māori land).

12. A biodiversity credit system could recognise efforts to protect, enhance and restore indigenous biodiversity in any habitat (on land, in freshwater, and / or coastal and marine environments) or only in some. Biodiversity credits could represent work on whole ecosystems or catchments or focus on endangered or taonga species or remnant habitats.

13. The discussion document suggests seven principles that could apply to the design of a government supported biodiversity credit system. The principles would let people know what they can expect when they participate in a biodiversity credit system and what is expected of them. For example, the system should have clear rules for the claims investors can make to avoid ‘greenwashing,’ should reward nature-positive activities additional to business as usual, and the system should maximise positive impact on biodiversity (including uplifting mauri and mana of biodiversity).

14. The discussion document also explains the components of a fully functioning system, including measurement, verification and reporting, legal recognition, potential ways credits can be traded and the roles of industry experts. It notes that regional and district councils could potentially play a role in providing expertise to landowners for biodiversity credit activities and / or projects.

15. The Government is exploring the possible roles it could play to support the establishment of a biodiversity credit system for Aotearoa New Zealand that would operate with both integrity and impact. It suggests the following two roles but notes that a blend of these options may be appropriate, which could evolve over time:

a) market enablement: where it provides policies and guidance for the development and uptake of voluntary schemes in Aotearoa New Zealand, and potentially funding for system development as the market is established. An enablement role seeks to influence the outcomes and operation of the market, using non-regulatory tools such as good practice guidance and optional standards.

b) market administration: where it establishes and manages a voluntary biodiversity scheme and is active in the ongoing management and administration. A market administration role includes setting a regulatory framework, with tools to direct the outcomes and the operation of the market.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Potential implications for Auckland Council

16. Given the nature of the government’s discussion document, it is difficult to be certain about the potential implications of a biodiversity credit system for Auckland Council as no clear proposals have been made about its scope, design and implementation or different roles central government and councils will have within the system.

17. There are potential benefits that a biodiversity credit system could have for funding protection, restoration, and enhancement of indigenous biodiversity on public and private land in the Auckland region. Depending on the scope and design of a biodiversity credit system (which will be developed following feedback on this initial consultation being undertaken by central government), it could be of relevance to initiatives undertaken locally seeking to achieve positive biodiversity and freshwater outcomes as they complement regulatory requirements (e.g. tree planting, stream restoration etc). However, as discussed in paragraph 13 above, one of the suggested principles for a biodiversity credit system is ‘it should reward nature-positive activities additional to business as usual’. For example, this suggests that funding derived from a credit should not serve to substitute funding provided to existing council programmes.

18. As the discussion document is at an early, exploratory stage, it is not clear yet what role councils should play or how the council group including local boards might benefit. MfE stated in a recent presentation to the Te Uru Kahika Resource Managers Group on 31 August that it is very open to hearing suggestions from councils.

19. Our feedback is likely to include a number of our own questions and different views from the council group about the system scope, design and implementation. In some instances, we may also be able to suggest different options for consideration by central government, e.g. in relation to the role councils could play:

a) little or no involvement by council?

b) some partnership with central government to help identify focus areas for achieving best biodiversity outcomes?

c) council acts as a translator / navigator providing advice to landowners in the region about use of biodiversity credits and where to focus efforts?

20. There are 23 questions asked in the discussion document. NES staff have identified the key questions that are more about the system design and overall approaches that could be taken, which we thought local boards may want to focus any feedback on. These can be found in Attachment A of the agenda report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

21. Feedback from Kaipātiki Local Board is due no later than 29 September, to help inform the proposed council submission that will be presented to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee on 5 October 2023.

22. As part of preparing the council submission, staff will consider and present the potential impacts on climate, Māori and local board views as well as the financial implications, risks and mitigations in the report to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee. Due to this being an initial consultation to start the national conversation about a potential biodiversity credit system, central government’s discussion document is very exploratory in nature and does not set out a specific proposed system with clear scope, roles and implementation mechanisms to provide feedback on. Therefore, it is difficult to assess the potential impacts and implications at this stage, and this may become more evident in subsequent central government consultations when a more defined approach to the design and implementation of a biodiversity credit system has been developed and proposed.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Attachment A - Key consultation questions

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Taran Livingston - Lead Analyst, Natural Environment Strategy

Authorisers

Dave Allen - Manager Natural Environment Strategy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Chairperson	Ella Kumar, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Fiona Lai
Members	Roseanne Hay
	Mark Pervan
	Bobby Shen
	Jon Turner

Author	Vanessa Phillips – Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Author	Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Discussion document Bottom Fishing Access Zones in the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park